On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 03:11:16PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:36:10PM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > Most of the rest of the v7 discussion was about "Introduce a domain > > number for pci_host_bridge." I think we should add arm64 using the > > existing pci_scan_root_bus() and keep the domain number in the arm64 > > sysdata structure like every other arch does. Isn't that feasible? > > We can worry about domain unification later. > > I think that's what we were trying to avoid, adding an arm64-specific > pci_sys_data structure (and arm64-specific API). IIUC, avoiding this > would allow the host controller drivers to use the sysdata pointer for > their own private data structures. > > Also since you can specify the domain number via DT (and in Liviu's > v8 patches read by of_create_pci_host_bridge), I think it would make > sense to have it stored in some generic data structures (e.g. > pci_host_bridge) rather than in an arm64 private sysdata. > > (Liviu is thinking of an alternative API but maybe he could briefly > describe it here before posting a new series) > > -- > Catalin My plan is to keep the domain number in the pci_host_bridge and split the creation of the pci_host_bridge out of the pci_create_root_bus(). The new function (tentatively called pci_create_new_root_bus()) will no longer call pci_alloc_host_bridge() but will accept it as a parameter, allowing one to be able to set the domain_nr ahead of the root bus creation. Best regards, Liviu -- ==================== | I would like to | | fix the world, | | but they're not | | giving me the | \ source code! / --------------- ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html